Don't you mean that the other way around? "Any C++, Java, or Python, or <insert your lang here> program will eventually be written in a Lisp-based DSL that generates that language" ? Seems far more accurate to me than to claim that all LISP functionality is derivable in (more rigid, less flexible) language. What prompted you to say this in the first place? If LISP is the mother language, of course all the rest are but a subset.

They rewrote Crash Bandicoot. It was originally written in lisp and is now written,I'm guessing, not in Lisp.

The parent poster was factually correct.

Your statement while still holds true isn't the opposite of what the parent said - you've replaced rewritten with written. If you said "Any C++, Java, or Python, or <insert your lang here> program will eventually be rewritten in a Lisp-based DSL that generates that language"- you would be factually wrong in this account.

Isn't HN itself a counterexample?

Errr.... I would say that HN is not sufficiently complicated. Also don't believe HN is written in lisp, though I could be mistaken.

Hacker News is written in Arc, a dialect of Scheme, so kind of Lisp, yes.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arc_(programming_language)

some calling it simply an extension to Lisp or Scheme and not a programming language in its own right.

Written in Arc running on top of an old version of Racket.